Online exclusive
Many of us have witnessed harassment but not knowing what to do or how to do it safely means we’re often reluctant to speak out or step in. Rebecca Barry Hill talks to those who say active bystanders can make a life-saving difference on public transport and in public spaces.
Nurse Rebecca Powell, 45, still feels regret about the day, more than 20 years ago, she stood by as a woman walked through the doors of the hospital Powell worked in, tailed by a “burly and intimidating” man hurling insults and threats.
“I didn’t act,” she says. “I didn’t go to her. There are a number of things I could have done to protect her. She just looked desperate and walked back out of the reception area as he followed her. I hate to think what happened. My imagination has created lots of scenarios.”
Many years later, she witnessed a security guard “racially abusing” a Chinese bus driver at a North Shore wharf. This time, she swiftly reported the incident to the security guard’s employer, and approached the bus driver afterwards to let him know.
“I think [the driver] was a bit shocked – perhaps there’s a cultural element to that and maybe he hadn’t expected anyone to do anything about it. But it had just been me, and I felt like I couldn’t not do anything.”
Powell says in the years between, she has received through work invaluable de-escalation training that has given her the confidence to deal with flaring tempers. She has managed to calm agitated patients or family members simply by listening to them vent.
Verbal harassment, threatening behaviour and, sometimes, actual attacks are not uncommon in public places, particularly on public transport and in transit spaces. In June, a 16-year-old student was fatally stabbed at a Dunedin bus stop; later that month, a woman’s seemingly racially motivated attack with a metal rod left a 16-year-old Auckland bus passenger with three missing teeth. In early September, a bus driver was assaulted in West Auckland after a passenger refused to pay.
Reading about these, it’s tempting to ask if anything could have been done - without anyone else being harmed - to prevent them.
The advice from the NZ Police is simple: “We do not encourage people to get involved during violent incidents, for their own safety. Our advice is to call 111 immediately and provide as much information as you can do safely.”
But a new study from the University of Auckland says encouraging people to be “active bystanders” – those willing to take action when they see verbal harassment or intimidation – could be key to making vulnerable groups feel more confident about using public transport and might even reduce the likelihood of physically violent incidents.
“I see instances like these [recent attacks in the news] and I feel like we’re failing each other,” says Faculty of Engineering doctoral candidate Kirsten Tilleman, who led the study.
Originally from Montana in the USA, Tilleman worked as a consultant for public transport agencies on the safety and security of their systems, particularly for female passengers. Motivated by calls to back up her suggestions for improvements with hard data and impressed by the academic team at the University of Auckland, she moved to New Zealand to conduct her research.
Her recent survey of 524 Auckland-based participants looked at how women’s expectations of bystanders influence their transport decisions. She also looked at other intersectional identities, including LGBTQI+, those with disabilities and ethnic minorities. The survey focused on harassment (as opposed to physical violence), as instances of misogyny, racial bullying and other discriminatory behaviour are less likely to be reported, Tilleman explains.
“They’re also the common threads, the same drivers that lead people to assault or [on to] more severe forms of violence. This is part of the prevention in an effort to address that,” she says. “No one deserves to be harassed or targeted for any reason, especially people whose identities tend to be most marginalised. Public transport is so integral to connect people to their communities, to healthcare, to school, to shopping, to recreation, to life. And to have the ability to access that without fear or harassment or other forms of violence should just be something that we all have.”
The rise of active bystanders
Tilleman says while she agrees with engineering solutions such as good lighting, panic buttons, CCTV and clear lines of sight and, in Auckland, the introduction of 45 new security officers and driver protection screens, the vastness of the network requires a more “layered” approach.
Specifically, she is interested in active bystander programmes overseas and how they may help to reduce incidents of violence. In 2021, Bay Area Rapid Transit in the US launched an anti-sexual harassment campaign called Not One More Girl, which provides guidance to bystanders on how to intervene safely if they witness sexual harassment. It found that 52% of riders had been educated about the specific effects of harassment, 65% were more aware of sexual harassment and gender-based violence, and 59% felt they knew what to do should they witness harassment. Some 36% of respondents indicated the campaign and its policy changes made them feel safer.
In 2023, Transport for London (TFL), in partnership with police, launched a similar campaign to encourage a culture of active bystanders and provide guidance for passengers on how to safely intervene. Reports of sexual offences have since risen 10% on Tubes, trains and buses, accompanied by an increase in bystander intervention from passengers, according to TFL, which sees this as a positive sign the campaign has been successful.
In New Zealand, the public can go to the police or report antisocial behaviour anonymously to Crime Stoppers, but a common refrain is that our default modes of dealing with harassment leave all the onus on the victim to do something, i.e. report an incident.
Tilleman says to ensure such a programme is successful here, we first need to define what behaviour is allowed and not allowed, and make sure people understand how to report it. Her research has now piqued the interest of Auckland Transport, which is investigating the best ways to instigate a targeted, locally focused active bystander programme.
“The safety of our passengers and our drivers is our top priority,” says Auckland Transport Group Manager Public Transport Operations, Rachel Cara. “Everybody who uses public transport deserves to feel safe and be safe. So any campaigns that we can undertake that help improve that sense of safety or that sense of community as people travel about the network is something that we are absolutely committed to doing.”
Mixed messages?
As to whether the notion of an active bystander runs counter to the police’s advice not to get involved, Cara says the two do not have to be incompatible; any potential programme to upskill bystanders would be steered by police, she adds.
“I don’t think the only option is physically intervening in these situations because the last thing we want is for other people to be subject to physical abuse. But I often do hear people say they don’t know what to do in these situations.”
There’s a misconception, adds Tilleman, that an active bystander is someone who directly confronts a perpetrator.
No one deserves to be harassed or targeted for any reason, especially people whose identities tend to be most marginalised.
Instead, she recommends indirect tactics that can help to de-escalate, interrupt or calm a situation. She points to US-based anti-harassment organisation Right to Be, a non-profit that provides online training on what it calls “The 5 Ds of Bystander Intervention:’ Distract, Document, Delegate, Direct and Delay.
Tilleman says these tactics are not completely incompatible with the police’s advice. For example, delegate means asking for help, which could simply mean dialling 111, and document refers to providing important information, such as a physical description of someone, a bus stop number or train station.
Distract could be as simple as dropping a water bottle to make a noise, or asking someone being harassed for the time, she explains. Delay means checking in with a victim after an incident, seeing how they are and affirming to them that what they experienced was not okay.
“Research has documented [and experience knows] that when people experience harassment and no one around them says anything, that lack of any acknowledgement of what happened can further the harm caused by the harassment,” says Tilleman. “It can contribute to the person feeling more alone and like no one cares or even that others didn’t see anything wrong with what happened.”
While the NZ police won’t be drawn on the potential of such programmes here, they do have advice for anyone seeking to document an incident, (as per the 5Ds) by filming it on their phone, for example.
“Police would only recommend filming an incident if it was safe to do so/it would not put that person in danger. We ask that people prioritise their personal safety and report a matter to police as soon as it’s safe to do so.”
They also reiterate their earlier advice not to get involved but to contact 111.
Bystander confusion
There are many reasons people don’t step in to help others in public, says associate professor Danny Osborne of the University of Auckland’s School of Psychology. They may simply be prioritising their own safety; they might feel apathetic; or it could be “the bystander effect”.
This refers to the phenomenon of shared responsibility, the irony being that you’re much more likely to receive help if you are with one other person than if you’re surrounded by hundreds because then the rationale is that “someone else will help”.
In early September, US jiu-jitsu champ Chris Bower tried to avoid a physical altercation by running away from a stranger who had demanded money and threatened him on Auckland’s Viaduct. Bower called out for help from bystanders but no one intervened.
When the man chased Bower into a cafe and attacked him, Bower put him into a choke hold until the police arrived. Afterwards, the athlete spoke publicly of the need for self-defence training, and implied that otherwise well-meaning bystanders were ill-equipped to know what to do.
“It’s a prime example of the bystander effect,” says Osborne. “I don’t want to imply that people should step in front of somebody with a knife, but there are different ways you can help. You can call the police. You can help someone get to a place where they feel safe and secure, without putting yourself in harm’s way.”
Studies have suggested that individualistic cultures are less likely to help others in harmful situations, as opposed to those that are more community focused. Tilleman also discovered this in her research, finding stronger responses towards a more collective mentality to safety from Asian, Māori and Pasifica communities than those indicated by NZ Europeans.
But we shouldn’t beat ourselves up for succumbing to the bystander effect, says Osborne.
“These are general psychological processes that impact all of us,” he says. “It doesn’t mean that you’re a bad person if you fall prey to these things. But be aware that other people are also thinking the same thing: ‘should I intervene or should I not?’ Often, we look around to see what everyone else is doing and the inaction winds up creating a norm of not helping.”
